Law Commons^™

Appropriation Without Representation? The Limited Role Of Indigenous Groups In Wipo's Intergovernmental Committee On Intellectual Property And Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge, And Folklore, Veronica Gordon

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

The World Intellectual Property Organization's (WIPO) Intergovernmental Committee on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge, and Folklore (IGC) is currently engaged in text-based negotiations to develop an international legal instrument, or set of instruments, that will effectively protect traditional knowledge, traditional cultural expressions, and genetic resources. Yet, the people who will arguably be most affected by the ultimate instrument(s)--indigenous peoples and local communities--are not able to fully participate in these negotiations. Instead, WIPO deems them "Observers." They cannot formally present proposals, amendments, or motions, and cannot vote at IGC sessions. Thus, their limited influence implicates questions of equity, sovereignty, …

Corrective Justice And Copyright Infringement, Patrick R. Goold

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

This Article demonstrates that one important goal of copyright infringement cases is the achievement of corrective justice. The importance of corrective justice to the copyright system is demonstrated by the law's continual reliance on a bilateral litigation model. Sadly, because scholars and lawmakers often conceive of copyright in solely economic terms, corrective justice is often overlooked and demonstrable unfairness occurs as a result. This Article discusses three areas of contemporary copyright law where the failure to consider corrective justice leads to unfair outcomes: the provision of statutory damages in civil copyright claims, the availability of attorney's fees, and mass copyright …

Foreigners In Us Patent Litigation: An Empirical Study Of Patent Cases Filed In Nine Us Federal District Courts In 2004, 2009, And 2012, Marketa Trimble

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

One of the greatest challenges facing patent holders is the enforcement of their rights against foreign (non-US) infringers. Jurisdictional rules can prevent patent holders from filing patent infringement suits where they have the greatest likelihood of success in enforcement, such as where the infringer is located, has its seat, or holds its assets. Instead, patent holders must file lawsuits in the country where the infringed patent was issued. But filing a patent lawsuit in a US court against a non-US infringer may be subject to various difficulties associated with the fact that US substantive patent law (particularly as regards its …

Statutory Royalty Damages Under The Uniform Trade Secrets Act And The Federal Patent Code, Richard F. Dole Jr.

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

Optional statutory royalty damages are provided for by both the version of the Uniform Trade Secrets Act that has been enacted by most of the forty seven adopting states and the federal patent code remedies for infringement of utility patents. Notwithstanding periodic recommendations that the Uniform Act follow the patent code concept of statutory royalty damages, this article takes the position that differences between the Uniform Act and the Patent Code regarding monetary remedies make it reasonable for the Uniform Act statutory royalty provisions to be construed more objectively than their federal counterpart. This will preclude statutory royalty damages acquiring …

How To Explain The "Implicit Exceptions" To Patent-Eligible Subject Matter, Wesley D. Markham

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

The Supreme Court has as of late taken renewed interest in what inventions or discoveries are deserving of entry into the patent system. Section 101 of Title 35 opens the door to "[w]hoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof." Certain things--now referenced by the Court as "laws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas"--necessarily fall outside the statute's scope. The question is, why? Not why as a matter of policy, but why as a matter of law. The Court has not yet picked (or at …

Explaining The Art Market's Thefts, Frauds, And Forgeries (And Why The Art Market Does Not Seem To Care), Gregory Day

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

Based upon a series of interviews with art market experts, this Article identifies and answers a significant, yet previously unexplored economics puzzle affecting the art market. Economics suggests that markets typically produce efficiency and social wealth, but when they fail, most actors should prefer remedial measures over an inefficient status quo. The art market currently is, and has been, plagued with frauds, thefts, forgeries, and market failure--a state of affairs that the governing legal framework has made worse. Despite this, the art market seems to adamantly, and puzzlingly, defend its business culture, rejecting attempts to remedy inefficiencies. In other words, …

Copyright, Plagiarism, And Emerging Norms In Digital Publishing, J. D. Lipton

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

Today's copyright law derives from the needs of the publishing industry in centuries past. The digital world creates even more significant concerns for authors and publishers than those that arose with the advent of the printing press. Digital technology enables easy, fast, and inexpensive global copying and distribution of digital texts. Other digitized industries--such as the music, movie, and video-game industries--have faced these challenges with a higher apparent success rate, at least in the courts, than the publishing industry. This Article considers why publishing has been less successful in protecting its online copyrights and examines the extent to which copyright …

Copyright's Knowledge Principle, Jenny L. Sheridan

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

This Article argues that copyright jurisprudence has lost sight of the knowledge principle at the heart of the constitutional justification for copyright. The Framers envisioned the objective of copyright as promoting the advancement of knowledge for a democratic society by increasing access to published works. Under what is best termed the "knowledge principle," access to existing knowledge is a necessary condition for the creation of new knowledge. Copyright jurisprudence has largely protected the interests of producers--from early booksellers to modern Hollywood film companies--failing to notice the central role of access to works as a necessary pre-condition to the creation of …

Once More Unto The Breach, Dear Friends: Broadway Dramatists, Hollywood Producers, And The Challenge Of Conflicting Copyright Norms, Carol M. Kaplan

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

In recent decades, studios that own film and television properties have developed business models that exploit the copyrights in those materials in every known market and in all currently conceivable forms of entertainment and merchandising. For the most part, uniform laws and parallel industry cultures permit smooth integration across formats. But theater is different. The work-made-for-hire provisions that allow corporations to function as the authors of the works they contract to create do not easily align with the culture and standard contract provisions of live theater. Conflicts arise when material that begins as a Hollywood property tries to make the …

The Institutional Progress Clause, Jake Linford

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

There is a curious anomaly at the intersection of copyright and free speech. In cases like Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the United States Supreme Court has exhibited a profound distaste for tailoring free speech rights and restrictions based on the identity of the speaker. The Copyright Act, however, is full of such tailoring, extending special rights to some classes of copyright owners and special defenses to some classes of users. A Supreme Court serious about maintaining speaker neutrality would be appalled.

A set of compromises at the heart of the Copyright Act reflects interest-group lobbying rather than a …

From State Street Bank To Cls Bank And Back: Reforming Software Patents To Promote Innovation, Parker Hancock

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

For the past several decades, the Supreme Court and Federal Circuit have struggled to determine if, and under what circumstances, software is patentable. Once again, the Federal Circuit had an opportunity to provide clarity when it granted en banc review in CLS Bank. The resulting opinion contained a cursory per curiam decision and numerous concurrences and dissents, showing that the question is far from answered. Ultimately, the struggle over software patentability is not itself the problem, but a symptom of other problems in the patent system. Specifically, other substantive requirements of patentability are not weeding out overly broad patents because …

"What He Said." The Transformative Potential Of The Use Of Copyrighted Content In Political Campaigns--Or--How A Win For Mitt Romney Might Have Been A Victory For Free Speech, Deidre A. Keller

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

In January 2012, Mitt Romney's campaign received a cease-and-desist letter charging, among other things, that its use of news footage concerning Newt Gingrich's ethics problems in the House of Representatives constituted a violation of NBC's copyright. This is just the latest such charge and came amidst similar allegations against the Gingrich and Bachmann campaigns and in the wake of similar allegations against both the McCain and Obama campaigns in 2008. Such allegations have plagued political campaigns as far back as Reagan's in 1984. The existing literature is nearly devoid of a consideration of such uses as political speech protected by …

Implied Obviousness: Reevaluating The Jury's Role In Nonobviousness After Kinetic Concepts, Michael A. Silliman

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

Nonobviousness is a central patentability requirement, requiring that a person with ordinary skill would not have found the patented subject matter obvious. Due to its flexibility, obviousness is the most commonly litigated requirement. It is thus crucial that the US judicial system determine obviousness uniformly, predictably, and accurately. However, because nonobviousness is a mixed question of law and fact, it is often unclear how much control the judge and jury have over the ultimate conclusion. In Kinetic Concepts v. Smith & Nephew, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit increased the jury's role in the obviousness determination, …